Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. South Carolina Public Service Commission

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. South Carolina Public Service Commission

380 S.E.2d 825, 298 S.C. 347, 1989 S.C. LEXIS 135

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedJune 5, 1989

Docket23031

StatusPublished

This text of 380 S.E.2d 825 (Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. South Carolina Public Service Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Peoples Natural Gas Co. v. South Carolina Public Service Commission, 380 S.E.2d 825, 298 S.C. 347, 1989 S.C. LEXIS 135 (S.C. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Affirmed pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 23. Our reasons are essentially the same as those of the Circuit Court. We reject the argument that the Court applied the wrong standard of review. See S. C. Code Ann. § 58-9-1450 (1976) (“All orders of the Commission shall be deemed prima facie just and reasonable----”); GTE Sprint Communications Corp. v. Public Serv. Comm’n, 288 S.C. 174, 179, 341 S. E. (2d) 126, 128-29 (1986) (“The Public Service Commission is recognized as the ‘expert’ designated by the legislature to make policy [348]*348determinations regarding utility rates; thus, the role of a court reviewing such decisions is very limited.”). We decline to make any legal distinction between transmission service and distribution service. Any such distinction will have to be made, if at all, by the Public Service Commission or the Legislature.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam:

Affirmed pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 23. Our reasons are essentially the same as those of the Circuit Court. We reject the argument that the Court applied the wrong standard of review. See S. C. Code Ann. § 58-9-1450 (1976) (“All orders of the Commission shall be deemed prima facie just and reasonable----”); GTE Sprint Communications Corp. v. Public Serv. Comm’n, 288 S.C. 174, 179, 341 S. E. (2d) 126, 128-29 (1986) (“The Public Service Commission is recognized as the ‘expert’ designated by the legislature to make policy [348]*348determinations regarding utility rates; thus, the role of a court reviewing such decisions is very limited.”). We decline to make any legal distinction between transmission service and distribution service. Any such distinction will have to be made, if at all, by the Public Service Commission or the Legislature.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

380 S.E.2d 825, 298 S.C. 347, 1989 S.C. LEXIS 135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peoples-natural-gas-co-v-south-carolina-public-service-commission-sc-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack